Stefan Dragulinescu THOMAS OF HEREFORD’S MIRACLES MA Thesis in Medieval Studies Central European University Budapest CEU eTD Collection May 2011 i THOMAS OF HEREFORD’S MIRACLES by Stefan Dragulinescu (Romania) Thesis submitted to the Department of Medieval Studies, Central European University, Budapest, in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the Master of Arts degree in Medieval Studies Accepted in conformance with the standards of the CEU ____________________________________________ Chair, Examination Committee ____________________________________________ Thesis Supervisor ____________________________________________ Examiner ____________________________________________ Examiner CEU eTD Collection Budapest May 2011 i THOMAS OF HEREFORD’S MIRACLES by Stefan Dragulinescu (Romania) Thesis submitted to the Department of Medieval Studies, Central European University, Budapest, in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the Master of Arts degree in Medieval Studies Accepted in conformance with the standards of the CEU ____________________________________________ External Examiner Budapest May 2011 CEU eTD Collection ii THOMAS OF HEREFORD’S MIRACLES by Stefan Dragulinescu (Romania) Thesis submitted to the Department of Medieval Studies, Central European University, Budapest, in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the Master of Arts degree in Medieval Studies Accepted in conformance with the standards of the CEU ________________________ Supervisor ____________________________________________ External Supervisor CEU eTD Collection Budapest May 2011 iii I, the undersigned, Stefan Dragulinescu, candidate for the MA degree in Medieval Studies declare herewith that the present thesis is exclusively my own work, based on my research and only such external information as properly credited in notes and bibliography. I declare that no unidentified and illegitimate use was made of the work of others, and no part of the thesis infringes on any person’s or institution’s copyright. I also declare that no part of the thesis has been submitted in this form to any other institution of higher education for an academic degree. Budapest, 25 May 2011 __________________________ Signature CEU eTD Collection iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Gábor Klaniczay has read successive drafts of this thesis, provided innumerable materials, comments, and suggestions, and has borne with great kindness and understanding my hesitations and side-tracking as a newcomer to history. Gerhard Jaritz, Marcell SebĘk, and Carsten Wilke have given me useful suggestions, feedback and criticism. Judith Rasson has gone through the English of my text and her course on Academic Writing was very useful. Very useful was also Cristian-Nicolae Gaúpar’s Latin Beginners course. Annabella Pál has been supportive and kind all throughout the year. Last but not least, István Perczel’s comments, advise and encouragement were instrumental for carrying out this thesis till the end. To all of the above, thank you! CEU eTD Collection v TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Abbreviations ..................................................................................... 2 Introduction ................................................................................................... 3 Chapter 1. Thomas Cantilupe and his canonization......................................... 8 1.1 The only Englishman canonized in the fourteenth century..................... 8 1.2 A Curial Treatise on Miracles ............................................................. 12 1.3 Analyses of the treatise – Vauchez and Kleinberg............................... 16 1.4 Methodology ...................................................................................... 24 Chapter 2 – Wonder, Aquinas, and Engelbert of Admont ............................. 28 2.1 Le Goff on wonder and saints ............................................................. 28 2.2 Aquinas, Engelbert of Admont and the thirteenth century Aristotelianism..................................................................................................... 31 2.3 An Inference on the Best Explanation ................................................. 37 Chapter 3 Augustine on Miracles ................................................................. 42 3.1 Genesis in the Confessions.................................................................. 44 3.2 Miracles in Augustine......................................................................... 49 3.2.1 Miracles as merely signs (arousing wonder) ................................. 51 3.2.2 Miracles as merely signs (arousing wonder) ................................. 52 3.2.3 Miracles as merely signs (arousing wonder)................................ 57 3.3 So far away from the processes of canonization .................................. 61 3.4 The Augustinian style of reasoning and the curialist’s study ............... 69 Chapter 4. Conclusion and Further Research................................................ 73 Bibliography ................................................................................................ 77 Primary sources........................................................................................ 77 Secondary sources .................................................................................... 78 CEU eTD Collection 1 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AA.SS Acta Sanctorum NPNF Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, ed. Philip Schaaf. 14 vols. New York: The Christian Literature Co., 1886-1890. CEU eTD Collection 2 INTRODUCTION This thesis entails an analysis of Saint Thomas of Hereford’s miracles as reflected in his canonization process with a view to understanding the general way in which the interpretation of miracles changed in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries in contrast to the understanding of miracles in late antiquity and the early medieval period. Different notions of how God can be present extraordinarily in the world pervaded the period demarcated by St. Augustine’s treatment, in his De Civitate Dei, of the miracles produced at Uzalis by the relics of St. Stephen,1 and, at the other end, by Aquinas’ meticulous survey, in his Summa Contra Gentiles, of what can occur contra naturam, praeter naturam and supra naturam.2 Augustine was writing at a time when, at its inception, the cult of saints was gaining legitimacy through the figures of martyrs and when cultivated Christians, befuddled by the turbulent disintegration of the Roman Empire, were under pressure from Stoicism, Manicheism, and Neoplatonism.3 Aquinas was writing in a period when the ideal of sainthood was heavily questioned (indirectly by) Cathar heresies and (directly by) the figure of St. Francis,4 and when (potential) saints were scrutinized with juridical attentiveness in papal canonization processes,5 while Aristotle’s physical and metaphysical writings, re-introduced in the West through the Arab pathway (and heavily interpreted by 1 Augustine, The City of God [De Civitate Dei], tr. Marcus Dods, in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers Series I, Volume 2 (NPNF V1-02) ed. Philip Schaaf (New York: The Christian Literature Co, 1886) 22.8-22.10. 2 Aquinas, On the Truth of the Catholic Faith [Summa contra Gentiles], trans. Anton C. Pegis, James F. Anderson, Vernon J. Bourke, and Charles J. O’Neil (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, CEU eTD Collection 1975). Aquinas’s definition of miracle was refined in the eighteenth century by Pope Benedict XIV and has since remained the standard approach to miracles in the Catholic Church. See J. A. Hardon, “The Concept of Miracle from St. Augustine to Modern Apologetics,” Theological Studies, No. 15 (1954), 229–257. 3 See Peter Brown, Augustine of Hippo – A Biography (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1967). 4 Aviad Kleinberg, Prophets in Their Own Country (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992), 1- 16, 21-32, also idem, “Canonization without a Canon,” in Procès de canonisation au Moyen Âge. Aspects juridiques et religieux – Canonization Processes in the Middle Ages. Legal and Religious Aspects, ed. Gabor Klaniczay, (Rome: École française de Rome, 2004), 11. 3 Avicenna and Averroes), affected clerics’ minds in the recently created universities in Oxford, and Paris.6 Both Aquinas and Augustine viewed miracles as basically events that happened beyond the usual course of nature; yet, beside this “common” feature, one is tempted to say, everything else was different, or at least many things were different, from Augustine’s time in the thirteenth century. When looking at saints, their miracles, and the changes in how sainthood was perceived and portrayed during the Middle Ages, tracing the variations in the philosophy and theology of the miraculous can add to understanding the Weltanschauung that framed the writing of hagiographical texts, the decisions on canonization, the need to diffuse virtuous exempla in society, the mistrust in (some or all) reported miracles, or, to the contrary, the belief that saints can bring relief and protection. I attempt such an analysis for the case of St. Thomas of Hereford (sometimes also called St. Thomas Cantilupe), one of the last English saints of medieval England and the only Englishman canonized in the fourteenth century. For his canonization process there is -- besides the classical elements of the bull of canonization,7 hagiographical writings,8 and the acts of canonization9 – a curial manuscript which sheds light on the “internal” deliberations of the papacy prior to the decision to acknowledge Thomas as a saint,10 which represents